ArticleNetwork neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Reconstructing brain functional networks through identifiability and deep learning.
Article in Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We propose a novel approach for the reconstruction of functional networks representing brain dynamics based on the idea that the coparticipation of two brain regions in a common cognitive task should result in a drop in their identifiability, or in the uniqueness of their dynamics. This identifiability is estimated through the score obtained by deep learning models in supervised classification tasks and therefore requires no a priori assumptions about the nature of such coparticipation. The method is tested on EEG recordings obtained from Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease patients, and matched healthy volunteers, for eyes-open and eyes-closed resting-state conditions, and the resulting functional networks are analysed through standard topological metrics. Both groups of patients are characterised by a reduction in the identifiability of the corresponding EEG signals, and by differences in the patterns that support such identifiability. Resulting functional networks are similar, but not identical to those reconstructed by using a correlation metric. Differences between control subjects and patients can be observed in network metrics like the clustering coefficient and the assortativity in different frequency bands. Differences are also observed between eyes open and closed conditions, especially for Parkinson's disease patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.